McDonald’s has asked a Cook County judge to reconsider its request to end a class action complaint involving allegations of misleading menu prices at O’Hare Airport locations.
Named plaintiff Farah Gohari initiated the complaint against McDonald’s in June 2016, alleging two McDonald's locations at O'Hare International Airport violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act with prices that exceeded, sometimes by 30%, those advertised on electronic menus.
Circuit Judge Kathleen Pantle presided over the case until retiring in July 2018. Circuit Judge Anna Loftus then took the case.
During a hearing to address depositions in July 2019, Gohari made a motion to substitute another judge in place of Loftus, but Loftus denied the request. In October 2020, Loftus approved a McDonald’s motion to dismiss the case. But in February 2022, an Illinois First District Appellate Court panel ruled Loftus should’ve allowed the substitution motion. It therefore vacated all subsequent rulings and remanded the complaint.
On April 20, 2023, presiding Judge Cecilia Horan denied a motion for summary judgment from McDonald’s. On May 22, the burger giant filed a motion to reconsider. Judge Horan’s ruling came after oral arguments, McDonald’s said, accusing her of misapplying Illinois law by saying there remained a factual dispute over whether Gohari was “actually deceived” in accordance with fraud law standards.
McDonald’s said Horan relied on Gohari’s subjective emotions — specifically testimony she “felt stressed out and under pressure” when buying the airport food — rather than assessing what information was available to Gohari and other similarly situated patrons.
“There are no exceptions under the ICFA for plaintiffs who felt hurried or rushed,” McDonald’s wrote. “Second, the court’s ruling did not properly consider the role that a customer receipt plays in evaluating ICFA claims.”
The company argued any time an Illinois court has considered differences between menu prices and what a customer pays, the opinion has held “the existence of an accurate receipt from which a consumer could detect the pricing discrepancy negates” fraud claims.
Defendants in every such action were able to win dismissal, McDonald’s said, including a March 2023 opinion from U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis dismissing a claim against Walmart that held, in part, the customer could’ve challenged the pricing discrepancies while still inside the store.
“Gohari had all the information she needed at the point of sale to know there was a discrepancy between the posted price and the register price of the Steak & Egg McMuffin meal she purchased,” McDonald’s said. It alleged she complained about the price of all three orders, said workers repeatedly told her the menu prices were incorrect and noted she demanded the store honor the posted price.
Whether she felt rushed should be irrelevant, McDonald’s said, pointing to a 2018 case in federal court in Chicago in which it won dismissal against a plaintiff who sued because her food would’ve been less expensive as a la carte purchases versus a combination meal. In that case, Killeen v. McDonald’s, the court wrote: “Plaintiff may not have wished to take the time to compare prices, but there is no question that doing so would have dispelled the deception on which her claims are based.”
Even if a customer’s time to do math could be factored, McDonald’s continued, Gohari testified she spent “approximately 15 minutes at the counter placing her orders, speaking with restaurant personnel about why the total of those orders was higher than she expected, asking if the restaurant would honor its menu board pricing, paying for her food, receiving her receipt and taking pictures of the digital menu board.”
Gohari has been represented by Clinton A. Krislov and Kenneth Goldstein, of Krislov Associates, of Chicago.
McDonald’s is represented by Smith, Gambrel & Russell, of Chicago.